this post was submitted on 22 Jun 2026
28 points (100.0% liked)
marxism
3991 readers
5 users here now
For the study of Marxism, and all the tendencies that fall beneath it.
Read Lenin.
Resources below are from r/communism101. Post suggestions for better resources and we'll update them.
Study Guides
- Basic Marxism-Leninism Study Plan
- Debunking Anti-Communism Masterpost
- Beginner's Guide to Marxism (marxists.org)
- A Reading Guide (marx2mao.com) (mirror)
- Topical Study Guide (marxistleninist.wordpress.com)
Explanations
- Kapitalism 101 on political economy
- Marxist Philosophy understanding DiaMat
- Reading Marx's Capital with David Harvey
Libraries
- Marxists.org largest Marxist library
- Red Stars Publishers Library specialized on Marxist-Leninist literature. Book titles are links to free PDF copies
- Marx2Mao.com another popular library (mirror)
- BannedThought.net collection of revolutionary publications
- The Collected Works of Marx and Engels torrentable file of all known writings of Marx and Engels
- The Prolewiki library a collection of revolutionary publications
- Comrades Library has a small but growing collection of rare sovietology books
Bookstores
Book PDFs
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I haven't read Rockhill's book yet, but I've watched several of his interviews discussing the book. I think that's basically the point he's making. The focus is not so much on individuals but on the roles that they assume, roles that exist independently of them — a familiar concept to Marxists. Of course, the degree of individual culpability varies with the individual... some people were/are unashamed bastards (see Žižek) and some were more well-meaning but misguided.
but the fact they are finding and funding them doesn't make the theory wrong in itself, just more likely to be useless. plus, maybe i've gotten the wrong impression, but i think he treats their disciples as guilty by association. marcuse and his ilk are shit marxists not because he sometime was oss-funded, he was oss funded cause he is a shit marxist (well not oss in his case, his work was later anyway) if that makes sense. zizek is a cultural influencer and thus not a marxist is very simple, zizek is funded by 50 ngos with some shaddy ties and thus not a marxist is very unclear lense. some marxists could receive funding incidentally (especially in academia, good luck avoiding rockafeller/ford/soros foundations somewhere)
trusting in cia funding as an indicator of shittiness rather than using your own eyes and mind is not a good recipe for rescuing marxism from sociology.
Theres an annoying tendency in leftist circles to instead of reading a book and examining it themselves while being aware of the biases the author may has had, to instead go use whatever a google search has turned up as an excuse not to read. Investigation seems often limited to finding reasons not to investigate further
I agree most stuff is slop (as with most of the media produced in bourgeois society)
The issue i'm talking about is when instead of investigating the slop, its claims, criticising it, etc (as past marxists have), many online leftists beeline to google a reason not to do this work. "My google search said the author is a liberal bourgeois academic" should be the starting point of the investigation, but too often this is where peoples investigation ends, with an excuse not to read or criticise.
I will admit some people go after reading a bit "ok its definitely slop, i'll read something else instead" and this is fine, but ime the vast majority go "the thought leader said its slop, i dont have to read it" and go back on youtube or tiktok.
I slightly disagree on all history being entertainment, at least of some aspects of the 20th and maybe 19th centuries. Before then I agree that reading about it is generally for entertainment with no real applicability to the struggle.
But the 19th and 20th centuries laid the whole foundations for where we find ourselves today, which I find useful in agitation, particularly around the imperialist nature of NATO and the origins of world economy. Also the 1848 revolutions, paris commune, russian revolution and soviet project, chinese revolution and their projects, socialist revolutions and experiements' histories in general, are extremely useful and relevant to us as we look to replicate their successes and avoid their failures.
That isnt to say i think all histories of the 19th and 20th centuries are useful for the struggle; a lotta it is still entertainment stuff. But unlike the previous centuries, imo theres stuff in the 19th and 20th we still really gotta understand today to be effective revolutionaries